Last year, the Ombudsman received a record number of complaints – the highest by far since the scheme came into existence 20 years ago.
The report, covering last year and published this morning, says there were investigations into 1,330 complaints, split into 646 sales complaints and 672 lettings complaints, with the remainder relating to HIPs and leasehold management.
The number of investigated complaints was 28% higher than the previous peak in 2008, of 1,043.
Altogether, the Ombudsman’s office dealt with 13,599 initial inquiries, a 6% increase on 2009. Some were outside his reference, leaving a total of 11,794 inquiries.
Of those that went on to be investigated, the majority of cases last year (79%) were closed within 120 days, with 38% being resolved within 90 days.
Altogether 1,083 cases were closed for both sales and lettings, with the Ombudsman finding in favour of 997 complainants all told. Complaints were not upheld in 221 cases.
Of the complaints made against sales agents that went to formal review, the large majority of cases involved failure of communication, followed by the way the agent responded to a complaints, followed by complaints about sales details.
The majority of complaints came from sellers – 377 as opposed to 167 from buyers.
Henry Pryor’s blog today also covers the Ombudsman’s role.
Letting Agent Today will provide coverage of letting complaints in its next bulletin which goes online tomorrow.
.png)
Comments
Ok, I've had to change appointments, and tell people a property has gone to someone else, but my gods r'n'r you did meet a load of numptys and muppets didn't you? Wish I could say it sounded like you met the worst ones but sadly I know it's probably not true!
I'd vote for 'general tosspottery' too, think I'm going to adopt it as my phrase of the week!
Jonnie: "...general tosspottery"! I vote THAT to be the descriptive phrase of the CENTURY!!
It is fantastic to see 'opposing corners' coming to meet in mutual agreement on something. Yes, r'n'r - you were treated MOST unfairly; MOST unprofessionally - and the 'Agent' in question should think themselves very fortunate that you did not make a formal complaint.
At the very least, the Agent should offer to refund the monies you paid over for the credit refs.
A clear case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing - so they both did nothing.
I am confident that the majority of Agents who post on here will also agree - and deeply regret the fact that companies like the one you were unfortunate enough to encounter are associated with theirs by virtue of being in the same business.
As an Agent, I worked to IMPROVE the reputation of the profession in my little patch of dirt. I believe I succeeded in the eyes and minds of many - but it was a tough challenge. I took over from a guy who offen gave over-the-phone 'valuations' if he felt his time was being wasted. I have a view on that. When on an appraisal, the valuer is being paid to talk to the prospective vendors. THEY have to sit and listen to him/her FOR NOTHING! The least thatthe valuer can do, therefore, is give these people the time and respect that they deserve. Of course, the words 'valuer' and 'prospective vendor' can be replaced with whatever suits the situation. But for that reason, I ALWAYS thank people for their time listening to me - or in this instance, for taking the time to read what I have to say. ;0)
I look forward to times of continued mutual agreement and appreciation of views. Compared to the Hendry fiasco, this is a wonderfully welcome change. ;0)
Don’t know about you Peebee but im with Rant, this lot that knobbed him about with all that stupid viewing / referencing / general tosspottery sound like a truly hateful little outfit..
Rant – Im with you mate………I guess they won’t be top of the list in the future if (and I agree, let’s not do this now) you become a landlord and want to let a place?
Today’s buyers / tenants are tomorrow’s vendors / landlords (delete as applicable), that concept has done well for me and the rest of Jonnie & Co for years.
Jonnie
Jonnie / Pee Bee
I didn't complain to an ombudsman - sorry if you got that impression. That might make the details below less interesting...
Both were relating to renting (I've written on another thread why I rent but am not looking to revisit that discussion here though!).
Wanted to relocate because existing pad was too cold. Checking EA sites daily. Found one on a website Monday evening. Contacted the EA overseeing it on Tuesday morning and asked if I could see it that day. They said that wasn't possible - the rentals person was out of the office until Wednesday. Booked for Wednesday instead, but Tues afternoon they rang up and said could I make it Friday.
Friday morning I waited 30 mins outside the property. Contacted the EA who said they had shown someone round the place on Thursday who had taken it there and then. I hit the roof because they had said they couldn't give me an appointment until Friday and I could have seen it any time before then. They had also made no effort to contact me and left me outside the property in sub zero weather. Rang up their head office and asked to speak to the manager. He took the details to speak to the local branch and call me back. 45 mins later he rang back with a big apology.
Next week it turned out that the landlord rejected the person who had taken it - not sure why. The agency manager rang me up with the news and gave me first choice. I was happy to take the place and, as I had said to the EA before, told the young lady showing me round that my company would let the property on my behalf. She said that was fine and insisted I fill out personal details for a credit check there and then because others were coming to view the house that afternoon and I might lose it again. I asked whether I should be filling details for a personal credit check if it was a company let. She insisted I should and said she would be showing people around this afternoon unless I stumped up the fee as well.
Turns out I should not have been credit checked for a company let, she should have known that, she shouldn't have taken the money from me but authorised the payment to the reference agency anyway. A day later the EA discovers that the landlord had not ticked a box saying they were willing to have company lets. It transpires that the landlord didn't know what the expression meant, so they hadn't ticked it. The same EA lets another property with my company and knows that my organisation goes with company lets because they often relocate British staff based overseas. Did the EA use that to reassure the landlord and share their very positive experiences of working with us? Absolutely not. I subsequently lost the property and money for the credit reference I never should have had.
Found a place two days later with another EA who handled things MUCH better I am happy to say.
Rant,
PeeBee is right, lets hear it, just the outline bits, no detail needed…….what did you raise a complaint about and was it upheld? Let’s have a good chat about it and see where it goes.
Don’t worry though, I meet many, many agents who I think are utter monkeys so im impartial /know there is some right berks out there, on the flip side there is many brilliant people.
Jonnie
rantnrave: "...last year I made two complaints about an EA I was dealing with!"
COME ON - spill the details!
Let US decide if the Agent(s) were in the wrong or not...
(could be interesting...)
And don't seasonally adjust the details... ;0)
Don't get me wrong Jonnie - last year I made two complaints about an EA I was dealing with!
Rant -
Crickey mate, you've been hanging around with us lot too long, your last post makes you sound like you're 'going native'
I'm starting to like you
Jonnie
rantnrave: "There are of course lies, damned lies, house price surveys, even more lies and statistics."
You forgot to add "seasonal adjustments", mate. You DO every other post!! ;0)
There are of course lies, damned lies, house price surveys, even more lies and statistics.
These days there are an ever-increasing range of ways people can complain. Those who are put off complaining face to face can whip out their latest i-gizmo and fire off their grievances that way. This must surely bump up the numbers too.
It's unlikely that there are more complaints, just that it is getting easier for people to make them. This should result in problems coming to light earlier and in the long-run lead to less complaints. The same all applies to other industries as well - banking, transport etc.
Jonnie: Of course, you are right that the percentage is minute using those figures, I would respectfully amend you transactions to approx 885,000 sales in 2010, not 550k... - ALSO ADD TO THOSE numbers the numbers of aborted sales of approximately 440,000 (someone seems to think that is one in three...), and, also (courtesy of Henry Pryor) another 2,212,500 - the 60% of properties that DO NOT SELL! Double the first, second and third; add the fourth for good measure plus all the rental peeps of 1.1mill you guesstimate (I ain't even gonna go there with the numbers of abortives and non-goers with rentals...) - you get a cool 5,962,500!! Using MY failed 'O'-Level methodology, that is ZERO POINT ZERO ONE SEVEN PERCENT of 'aggrieved' individuals.
Now if my chances of getting run over by a bus were THAT SMALL, I would walk on the road, cos the paths are dangerous places... ;0)
A rise in complaints? I listened to the interview on Radio 4 and it struck me that the complaints were all for agents registered with the ombudsman scheme.
With no reports of a rise in complaints against agents not registered with the ombudsman does that indicate the ombudsman scheme is not working?
Me thinks this is a bit of a marketing push for the OS,
Something I didn’t think of yesterday – lets do some old fashioned guessing and numbers on this…………….ready?
Rough number of sale transactions last year, lets call it 550,000
Two people per transaction, vendor & purchaser = 1,100,000
Rentals last year…..who knows but lets say it’s the same as sales with an individual each side of the let = 1,100,000
Total number of people involved in a sale or let last year = 2,200,000
Total number of complaints upheld = 997
So if my maths O level is worth the paper its written on then 0.045% of people were let down by their agent.
Well that’s an outrage this industry is a filthy, murky trade full of sharks and spivs, we need licensing now and if we don’t sell a customers house we should be made to sell our children and buy it off them
Jonnie
Everyone, including ombudsmen.
"Change is painful but someone has to initiate it, if others are to benefit from it."
"Change is painful but someone has to initiate it, if others are to benefit from it." Sorry - I can find NO record of this quotation - it IS a quotation, isn't it?
You post it like we should know it.
Or is it the one YOU want to be remembered by...?
Yes...I understand every concern including your own about the market, as a business owner with 3 EA offices I can assure you my attention to the market is well and truly focused. Plus 20 years in the business at 36 years old....I have not made it this far with ear muffs on!
But you seem to spin questions and answers so fast I think you are missing my point and forgetting what you are typing! You say I dont listen, (and in fairness I have not listened to your posts, I have read them, you would need to be talking to me for me to listen) it seems more you do not "think" or perhaps "read" and certainly you do not "believe" strongly enough in "your own" views to have the back bone to do stand up and be counted!
So a chance again for you to win a fan.....but you will need to read or listen to my question which ever you feel is right.......How can you value property based on the earnings of FTB's....YOUR comment on how to stop the problems!
Its really simple...RR your chance to put the reason behind the thought, you are asking me to listen, so I will do....tell me how your idea will work and stop complaints and flucuations in the housing market?
Ric, you struggle because you don't listen to people and then find out what needs to happen.
I am concerned because of the STATE of the market. Can you understand that?????
Look at what's happening, please.
I struggle to see who will benefit from the change you suggest RR..!
Me thinks it is merely a case of you having told yourself you are right that many times you actually believe it.....
Perhaps it is you who needs to change RR....it will be painful for you but we can all benefit from you changing a reckon, although other than this forum I assume you go relatively un-noticed much of the time.
Go on...... grow some b"!!s and take all the agents properties off your website if you are so confident agents are the issue! go on RR.....lead the way, initiate, be a leader, break away show people you are not just one for typing utter rubbish!
Everyone, including ombudsmen.
"Change is painful but someone has to initiate it, if others are to benefit from it."
Peebee ; I am sure he will get to you soon, hes very busy still commenting on his blog from a week ago, still coming out up with no ways of teaching us how to assess the price of houses,
Hell in fact, everyone get over there, its a hoot
So far we Have
1. Agents that research property prices before going out to meet a potential vendor, is irrelevant.
2. All agents should attend Tutorials to learn how to price correctly.
Plus many more
RR I think if he did read this thread he would perhaps be very greatful you are not an Estate Agent....!
"P.s – PeeBee, you definitely know better so I know you’re doing it for sport."
Who? Me? Jonnie - how very dare you insinuate such! ;0)
RR - you seem to be side-stepping me again. The valuing for mortgage purposes questions I raised some FOURTEEN POSTS below... answers please!
Gracias ;0)
Wow, the purple goblin just told me that it's raining Smarties!
So basically you've now insulted my intellingence and my ability to do my job....
Way to make friends there, bucko.
Country Lass, etc. It's how you do it, and whether those practicing as agents have the skill to do it - that's the problem.
The ombudsman's receiving a record number of complaints - from vendors - that's the problem.
I just hope he reads these posts to help enable him to understand where the difficulties lie.
PeeBee, Ric & Country Lass,
Careful Old Realising Reality gets proper daft after lunch (liquid in his case), and pushes further away from reality, stop goading him he’ll have a wet patch on his trousers and start spitting as he talks.
………………. You can envisage him sat at his desk in his horrid little office with a bit of a farty whiff rocking back and forth has he furiously types his posts not understanding why no one agrees with him
Leave the old duffer be, you’ll only make him worse if he thinks any one is listening
Jonnie
P.s – PeeBee, you definitely know better so I know you’re doing it for sport.
Y'know, sod it, I'm starting to think talking to the flippin' lampost would better, at least then I'd get a tan whilst wasting my time.
RR, after you accused me of slanging, I tried to be nicer, I tried to be more polite, and look what happened. YOU responded with schoolboy antics of questioning my intelligence and sticking your fingers in your ears until Mummy came home. What a waste of time and effort that was.
So if I walked into your hovel, and told you 'Sorry mate, it's not Buckingham Palace, it's actually more like the loony's tent by the side of the A459' you'd be happy with that? Me pointing out that your decorating skills would shame a colour-blind 3yr old, that good too?
Anyway guy, I'm off to chat to the purple goblin riding the green unicorn, he talks a damn sight more sense than you.
Let me know what the weathers like on your planet, won't you?
Country Lass, "Every vendor believes their home is a palace."
Yes, and THEY are your clients. Your job is to help them to understand the true picture, since you are supposed to know what current market values are?
That IS your job. Do you agree?
Sorry guys, I don't think your later posts are worth replying to.
PeeBee, does that mean we can only hit him once?
*pouts*
RR: Whilst I know she has responded, Country Lass (and many, MANY more souls to boot...) has already supplied FAR too much intelligent input to you - and you have failed to take heed of ANY of it!
You remind me of an old joke, which I have updated to suit the situation:
Q: What is the difference between a computer, and a 'retired' surveyor who runs an abysmal sell-by-owner (or not sell, as is the reality...) website - and spends all his waking hours trying to get the world to revolve the way HE wants it to, at the speed HE dictates?
A: You only need to punch information into the computer ONCE!!
;0)
RR just noticed your website does not have the ability to search for property less than £50,000.............
You tight sod! are you saying people who can only afford £50k and more should be buying houses!
or if your house is worth less than £50k you would rather not know!
Which is it?
Hey genius, some of us work for a living and can't reply straightaway.
Patience is a virtue.
Fine then, illegal, immoral, unethical, nasty, wrong, most non-triumphant, b!tchy, dishonourable, unprincipled, disgraceful, corrupt pick your favourite.
Lets use you and your home as an example. You want to sell it for £200k. I, as a first time buyer with no debts, 20% deposit and impeccable credit score want to pay £175k. I feel it needs new windows, the kitchen came from the Ark and the decor is awful. I think it will cost, say, £15k to do it to an 'ok' standard, but I want better, so I tell you £20k for it.
You believe that it was priced to reflect that and won't take less than the asking price.
I shrug, go and buy the house two doors down with a less offensive colour scheme for £180k. You lose.
Every vendor believes their home is a palace, the same as every mother with a screaming hell-beast in tow believes her child to be the most beautiful and perfect child that's ever existed, and angels appear sinful and dog-like beside it.
Every buyer wants to get a house for as little as possible. It's human nature, and unless you can brainwash the planet, it ain't gonna change.
Has Country Lass anything more intelligent to say?
RR "You don't have to delve into the level of wealth of the buyer, just negotiate based on the various genuine offers on the table. THATs your job"
Just tried this with an applicant (well in my head I did) I would look a right RR if I did it for RReal!
1) Young couple came in said they were looking for a 3 bed house, gave them one at £99,950 they said they wanted to spend more....
2) so I gave them a £400,000 3 bed detached, "too much they said!,
3) so I gave them a £150,000 property, too low this time they said!
4) Yep you guessed it RR I gave them a £350,000 one......this went on for a while before I notice the girlfriend say tell the poor sod what we want to pay.....this is getting a bit daft!
RR you are being serious now arent you? Agents should not be asking how much people want to spend...! class act RR your the man! PS all the agents properties are still listed come on show some back bone!
"And of course, when surveyors do mortgage valuations, they don't delve into the level of wealth of the buyer and if it's not sufficient, reduce the figure we value the house at!"
WE?? Sorry - are you suggesting that YOU ARE DOING MORTGAGE VALUATIONS?
WHO is signing them off? You are NO LONGER a member of RICS, are you not? ISVA were the only other recognised body - but they merged pre-2000...
Last time I enquired, membership of Cuckoos of the Planet Zog was not a recognised qualification by the major lenders or the CML - mind you, the CML still refers to HIPs on its' website so maybe their Members are from YOUR planet also...
Look forward to hearing from you. Having a good day? Mine is BRILLIANT! ;0)
Country Lass next, in this juddery dance, please.
RR - Your clearly confused....simply very very confused and YOU have no idea what YOU stand for! FACT!
If this is not FACT then take every agents property off your website! as these are the very people you are saying get it wrong! AND advertise on your homepage.....that vendors can advertise here to sell to the cheapest bidder. It wont work will it RR.....why do you think?
AND you say "People like you just sit in your chairs preaching, from their keyboards, a viewpoint that might have sounded good a few decades ago. It is so sad"
Classic COMING FROM the property person who says dont get an agent out just do it online! another contradiction from the man that is literally hiding behind the keyboard and half the agents in the country looking at his website!
GO ON RR have some back bone....BAN ALL AGENTS FROM YOUR SITE.....I DARE YOU........!
"And those who say they are NOT estate agents are as dangerous. Weren't you once a member of The NAEA and don't you still advise people about houses?"
You talkin' to me?
Now then - the Robert de Niro impression loses something in the translation from my head to the screen. A LOT LIKE the fact that pretty much ANYTHING you spout on here loses EVERYTHING in the translation to reality; to common sense - and legal trading under current Estate Agency LAW (note the capitalisation of the last word, please. It is important that you recognise that itsy, bitsy factoid.). But, of course, you want to change the LAW, don't you? What will the NEW one be called, I wonder? "Hendry's Law", perhaps? The "Realising Reality Act 2012", maybe? What would YOU like it to be known as - seeing as it will be YOUR LAW?
So - back to me I guess. Define/explain what you are getting at, Sir, please, with the above statement. Your vast superior intellect has lost this utter dunderhead on that one. Small words, please. Like I said before - small bites, fed regularly, are better than a feast.
Can't wait. I'm STARVING!!
Country Lass, You encapsulate the issue rather nicely.
However, I fundamentally disagree that it would actually be illegal, if agents knowingly sold the vendors property too cheap.
You don't have to act like a pact of hyenas to get the market price. You don't have to delve into the level of wealth of the buyer, just negotiate based on the various genuine offers on the table. THATs your job.
And of course, when surveyors do mortgage valuations, they don't delve into the level of wealth of the buyer and if it's not sufficient, reduce the figure we value the house at!
Not to burst your bubble, but it would actually be illegal if we knowingly sold the vendors property too cheap. Most Agents will try and strike some kind of middle ground, get the best price for the vendor, but without draining the buyers finances completely.
And as for fraternising with hyenas, if the hyena is trying to help you find a perfect property, so what? The more info I get from my buyers, the more I get to know them and what they actually want from a property. Every Agent knows that what a buyer first tell you they want, and what they actually buy are miles apart!
I think the reason you and I will never agree is that you seem to look from the numbers game, whereas I look at the PEOPLE. One thing I remeber from some of the seminars I've attended with Richard Rawlings is that we don't sell houses. We help people move on, to their first home, or into a new home.
It might also be because, despite what some of your furiously back-pedalling posts have said, you don't like Estate Agents, or anything we do.
(Continued from previous post)
Unlike looking at market comparables, estate agents often illicit, by multifarious means including by providing mortgage advice to buyers as a sideline, what each individual 'might' be able to afford to pay, and then they jack up the offers to negotiate for up to that amount from the unwitting buyer. This is unethical, it's criminal even, but they do it anyway.
How crazy is it that buyers are so easily conned into registering with an estate agent only to then tell them why they are moving, how much they have to spend and when they want to move in by.
Some even go as far as to mention they might get financial help from a relative if they find the ideal property! What they forget is they are telling the vendor's agent all this!!!!!!!
They forget estate agents ‘deal’ for a living. After showing you a few properties, they'll have figured out what your limits and aspirations are, just by showing you around half a dozen properties. You don't need that. It's like fraternising with a pack of hyenas at dusk. Not a good idea. X-(
And those who say they are NOT estate agents are as dangerous. Weren't you once a member of The NAEA and don't you still advise people about houses?
PeeBee on 2011-03-17 10:08:53 / Country Lass
Everywhere we turn, there are simply MASSIVE issues, and no-one is prepared to discuss and resolve any of them, especially you. People like you just sit in your chairs preaching, from their keyboards, a viewpoint that might have sounded good a few decades ago. It is so sad.
To answer your point. That's right. "Houses themselves are not, and never have been valued on the basis of how much individuals can pay for them." That is, EXCEPT by estate agents.
"prices of houses or flats for first-time buyers, should be pitched at affordable levels based on earnings and without buyers having to resort to excessive borrowing. Prices should also reflect the need for first-time buyers to save up a 25% cash deposit."
"ANS
Sorry, houses themselves are not, and never have been valued on the basis of how much individuals can pay for them."
Am I the only one seeing a bit of a contradiction here?
RR, you appear to be shooting yourself in the foot slightly.
You have been telling everyone that Agents value to obey the orders of the Vendors, when the true market value is what the average FTB can afford. Now you say you wouldn't sell your place to a financially qualified FTB for £75k (having already lost out on an offer of £140k on behalf of Sibley), which would offer a shining example to everyone in your area!
How can we poor, childish, moronic and pathetic Agents hope to change the market without trendsetters such as yourselves to guide us out of the pear-shaped market?
Have you never heard the saying 'if wishes were horses, beggars would ride?'
RR: "ANS
Sorry, houses themselves are not, and never have been valued on the basis of how much individuals can pay for them."
SORRY??
Please,then, explain why house prices are what they are today; and more importantly, what they WERE in 2007?
Hi Jonnie, I am slowly but surely getting to understand the written personalities of the authors on here!
very funny and I must say interesting reading much of the time, at 36 years old this is my 20th year in the industry and must admit Ive never really paid much attention to forums like this...but EAT is becoming somewhat addictive to me!
Aw, no Ric – leave him alone, he’s been on the sherbet again and is a bit of a joke, when he first popped up loads of us gave him the chance to explain and he couldn’t, went bonkers with about 5 million posts.
Ive compared him in the past to a tanked up Glaswegian vagrant, stumbling about talking cobblers to anyone that will listen, so lets just walk by and ignore him, he will hopefully pass out in a puddle of his own wee soon.
Jonnie
Another great idea to add to the 'agents should buy their own stock if its been o the market for more than three months' idea.
Saying that, I have a Valuation this morning, I roughly know its going to be arround the £220k mark, but I have a FTB, really keen but he can only afford £110k.
If i can really sell myself, my company and the FTB maybe I can get the Owner to sell his house for way under market value, which also would entail me not carrying out my job in getting the best possbile price for my vendor, which Im duty bound to do.
Does his refusal also mean that as the vendor he is dictating the price to the Agent.
Never seen that happen before....
Thanks RR for the answer.
So you agree that you can not value FTB property based on earnings!
Your own refusal to accept the bid from the person who "can only afford" is proof you too would hold out for a price you want to get......rather than helping a FTB!
Ric, Here is my reply to your question.
I earn £100,000 a successful business man who has been in rented all my life but I am a FTB, you earn £50,000 the same as me in terms of rented all your life so also a FTB we would both like to buy number 1 Acacia Avenue the perfect FTB house.....what price should the valuer price the property at based on the earnings mentioned?
ANS
The higher of 2 parameters, the first being one that you have not referred to -Either:
1. The price achieved by a sale of a comparable house in the market. (This would probably be a higher figure than 2).
2. The price the person offered, which was the higher of the two applicants you did mention.
What I am saying however, is that currently the market is pear-shaped. If it were perfect, first time buyers would be able to afford the houses most suitable for first-time buyers.
Perhaps pretend you are the vendor of 1 Acacia Avenue and ask yourself if the house is worth an amount based on the earnings of a ready willing and able FTB, which buyer would the vendor want in the above example!
ANS
Sorry, houses themselves are not, and never have been valued on the basis of how much individuals can pay for them.
However, to give you a guide as to how far pear-shaped current market prices have got, you may compare the market price with how much the most financially able first-time buyers can pay. Currently there is a significant discrepancy, as you will probably already know.
Hopefully you are with me now that it would be impossible to value a house or houses based on the earnings of people, FTB or whatever! Buyer affordability already dictates prices to some extent based on an offer they make, choose to make or can only afford to make, but you suggest prices should be applied that way in the first instance! so what it the difference in FTB salaries in your area! Minimum wage up to ??????
So then I asked would you let my friend buy your house for £75k regardless of its (possible higher value) because his earnings dictate this and he is a FTB and considers your house the perfect FTB opportunity! (Forget your opinion of your house, a FTB can buy anything after all!)
ANS
No I obviously would not, and therein lies the difficulty!
Peebee's post was atleast on long enough for some of us to read.....and it read very well indeed!
Yeah Yeah if you read it....I hope it touched a nerve!!
Personally PeeBee, I don't actually find your email offensive! I can understand why it may have to be deleted, but I think it puts the point across pretty well.
Thanks Rosalind.
RR - Thanks for your response! Your post suggests to me! that you think house prices should be valued based on the earnings of the buyers!
So in simple terms......
I earn £100,000 a successful business man who has been in rented all my life but I am a FTB, you earn £50,000 the same as me in terms of rented all your life so also a FTB we would both like to buy number 1 Acacia Avenue the perfect FTB house.....what price should the valuer price the property at based on the earnings mentioned?
Perhaps pretend you are the vendor of 1 Acacia Avenue and ask yourself if the house is worth an amount based on the earnings of a ready willing and able FTB, which buyer would the vendor want in the above example!
Hopefully you are with me now that it would be impossible to value a house or houses based on the earnings of people, FTB or whatever! Buyer affordability already dictates prices to some extent based on an offer they make, choose to make or can only afford to make, but you suggest prices should be applied that way in the first instance! so what it the difference in FTB salaries in your area! Minimum wage up to ??????
So then I asked would you let my friend buy your house for £75k regardless of its (possible higher value) because his earnings dictate this and he is a FTB and considers your house the perfect FTB opporunity! (Forget your opinion of your house, a FTB can buy anything afterall!)
Plus a full house is 5 not 4
I noticed the same thing Ric, seemed to be less on there too, although some of mine still were!
And Yeah Yeah ok, firstly please remember there are ladies present, and your choice of vocabulary not only demeans your intelligence but may also cause offence. You seem familiar with some of our names, may I ask if this is the first time you have posted, or are you simply afraid to give your 'true' username?
I don't know what industry is blessed with your presence, but if it has anything to do with the public, you will have complaints. Simples. Especially when money is tight and people need to try to keep it and resent paying for things they don't think they should. People outside the property market do not see all of the work that goes in to selling and purchasing, so of course people think we should work for nothing.
Ric:
I don't understand your terminology - please re-phrase your question.
I'm not always glued to this site either, so please be patient, if you want a considered answer.
Yeah, Yeah,
Im a bit disappointed you dint include me in you dip s**t group but never mind, well done on the profanity though, makes you look cool and funny, not like a prat at all, good work mate
Anyway, back to the article, I say GOOD. The thousands of dodgy agents and sharks are now being exposed with loads joining the scheme voluntarily and being found out for major crimes against the public with payouts literally running to almost a hundred quid in most cases.
Plus that funny geezer with the house price thing that he dribbles on about has chipped in, got to admire him; he can turn a discussion on anything round to his idea, still sounds like a loon but credit to him.
Jonnie
Ric, a word of reassurance. We don't give out anyone's email address or any other information.
Same old story here, same old faces refuse to believe how the common estate agent is viewed in the public eye. The article says record number of complaints, stop trying your bullshit spin!
Country lass and hd are in, all we need now is ace of spades and PeeBee, that'll be a full house of dip-shits
Now I know the fella! I am puzzled though I asked him if I am right (wardy may remember) to take my stock off his site but without giving him any of my details yet he has actually done what I asked it appears! how he knows which my company is? (maybe wrong on this)
Glad he has mind you! But puzzled as to how! The only way he would know me is EAT giving my email? Correct? As I have no profile! can't be a guess surely out of the entire UK!
Ric, RR is a gentleman by the name of Peter Hendry. He placed an .... interesting blog on here last week, it's still available if you have the time and patience to read it!
RR the website owner that allows direct listings the perfect tool to stamp out the "any old price" listings he/she detests so much! Advocating Letting vendors decide on price! Somewhat opposite to his "complaint"
I see now countrylass (I need to get to know the authors of posts) RR is a little confused by what he/she stands for!
That said he/she has probably tried taking this post away from complaints due to the sheer amount of complaints his/her website gets for being crap! RR please answer my valuing question If you can?
Sorry to disappoint you Ric, but some of us spent several days trying to get him to accept an offer of £140k from a FTB with a deposit, but we never heard anything back.
Still, a drop of £65k in offers will fuel his belief that the housing sky is falling down.......
If broken down these figures are not particularly high, more agents are joining and more members of the public becoming aware.
Im sure there are a lot of insdustries out there with high complaint rates that Estate Agents.
Mr RR; Again i think you should think before posting another ridsiculous 'Help the market scheme'.
I take it from what I read in your post, that you are suggesting vendors should be selling their homes below market value. Why should these people on the second tier suffer.
Plus your post has nothing to do with the related topic
RR you say - Secondly, to get the whole market responding once again, prices of houses or flats for first-time buyers, should be pitched at affordable levels based on earnings and without buyers having to resort to excessive borrowing. Prices should also reflect the need for first-time buyers to save up a 25% cash deposit.
ahhh now I see your complaint RR! So prices in your world should be based on peoples earnings! not so perfect!
right then, (so) I earn 100k a year, my neighbour 30k a year we are both looking to remortgage our houses, adjoining identical semis! the RICS surveyor, a knowledgable person has to put todays price on these semi's...so
What is number 1 (mine) worth and number 3 (his) worth respectively! I assume mine is worth more as I earn more? (you can imagine we are both buyers going for the same house if it makes it even harder for you to answer your own idea of pricing!)
and finally RR not knowing what property you own or how much it is I have another question! My mate doesnt earn that much but has a deposit of 25% based on a £75k and has the mortgage approved. He wants your house! Will you sell your house to him because thats what he can afford?
Your own idea would have you more at risk to complaint than any other agent I know! Yes Mrs X your house is worth £50k because Mr Y can pay that...oh wait just had a Text Mr K earns more so your price has just gone up!!!...where do I stop!
"I'm complaining because the EA said they could sell my two-bed terrace for 200K and I haven't had a single viewing in four months..."
Just don't join, many dont!
The Agents I've spoken with appear to be deaf, when it comes to understanding that people are not happy with the services they provide.
My assessment of the situation suggests it's asking prices that are mainly to blame for the market's stagnation. The problem, in a nutshell, is that estate agents know that if they started being honest about house prices, other agents would just exaggerate them to gullible vendors, and then take all the business! This means the valuation process is broken at the very first link in the chain. No wonder vendors are complaining in numbers. I know of some personally.
The increasing gap between the prices agents are currently trying to sell houses for and the prices they are actually selling them for, is causing the market to stall.
It is said that more than 60% of houses placed on the market currently don't sell within the year. This is diabolical. What has gone wrong with estate agent's asking prices?
The idea that nothing is broken, as far as the process of marketing with estate agents is concerned is ludicrous, but agents have refused my requests to investigate what is causing this, or to try and improve things. So, if they won't who will?
Secondly, to get the whole market responding once again, prices of houses or flats for first-time buyers, should be pitched at affordable levels based on earnings and without buyers having to resort to excessive borrowing. Prices should also reflect the need for first-time buyers to save up a 25% cash deposit.
If this could be accomplished, and everything in the rest of the market geared from there, a recovery of the whole market would follow.
There are plenty of aspiring first-time buyers who are now waiting to buy. If the available property is priced within their means, the market will return to activity.
I agree with rich. Its only estate agents who have these leaches putting out negative press statements to serve their own needs. The legal world looks after there own so we dont hear anything about how shocking they are.
Ben - in fact, with transactions so low, you'd have epected fewer complaints, not a record number. I agree membership is up, but not by much. It's the number of transactions that should make the difference, so it makes no sense that with low transactions, complaints about sales agents should rise. Of course, lettings transactions were probably higher last year, but they don't seem to have led to as many complaints as one might have thought. Wasn't the Ombudsman expecting a lot more complaints re lettings than re sales? Yet, it hasn't happened. Strange!
Over one-third, almost half of the complaints, in both sales and lettings, in London and South England.....
What the report also fails to mention, is how many of the upheld complaints were for less than £100. Those type of complaints help to boost his numbers and show what a strong ombudsman he is, but they would never stack up in court. So come on TPO, give us information instead of lies, damn lies and statistics!
What the article fails to mention is that the number of member agents has also increased which will therefore naturally increase then number of complaints. I would suggest that in these times of economic trouble, buyers and sellers are looking for ways of clawing money back, and the agent is often an easy target.
I wonder how many more complaints are being made about solicitors who offer a poor service? They are often the real reason for slow chains and sales falling through.